Finally flew the Hellcat tonite - weather was picture perfect and dead calm conditions. Put 3 flights on it just cruising around. The last flight was timed to 6mins (6:08s) which was great!

As I menioned I have had one before but it was 20oz RTF with the same powerpackage. The now lower weight really payed off in the slow speed handling dept. and reduced throttle usage hence the good duration. I'm gonna fly this puppy a lot more

Having flown these planes with a variety of power packages, I've come to the conclusion that POWER loading is more of an issue than wing loading. With a brushless motor and 800AR cells, they still fly nicely and are easy to launch and land, even though the all up weight is 22 ounces or more.

But with a humble 6V S400 for power, you're a lot better off at 18 ounces. 19 is okay, but anything over that and performance really starts to suffer.

So you say its okay to put either my Kontronik FUN400-23 or -28 with 8zapped CP1300's to use?

Seriously Jim I agree with you. Wingloading is only an issue if you havent the power to haul it around. I've learnt that from playing with my EDFs.

My current Hellcat (aka Pussycat ) is a very sweet flyer which I'll certainly enjoy more. I really liked the slowspeed handling which was missing in my first and heavier Hellcat. It flew very fine that one too but it needed to get up on step before it calmed down.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Haldor:So you say its okay to put either my Kontronik FUN400-23 or -28 with 8zapped CP1300's to use?

Wellll, there IS a limit to how far you can take this....

Seriously Jim I agree with you. Wingloading is only an issue if you havent the power to haul it around. I've learnt that from playing with my EDFs.

That's a very good point, Haldor. The guys getting the best results with EDFs tend to be the guys flying planes with comparatively high wing loadings. Klaus Scharnhorst aptly described this approach by saying that you should use the smallest airframe that can accommodate the power system. This means that you end up with a plane that has minimum WEIGHT (high thrust to weight ratio) and low drag, but a rather high wing loading. Pylon racers illustrate the same approach.

My current Hellcat (aka Pussycat ) is a very sweet flyer which I'll certainly enjoy more. I really liked the slowspeed handling which was missing in my first and heavier Hellcat. It flew very fine that one too but it needed to get up on step before it calmed down.

This little Hellcat is surprisingly docile. It gives ample warning of a stall if you're paying any attention at all.

Originally posted by Jim Ryan:
That's a very good point, Haldor. The guys getting the best results with EDFs tend to be the guys flying planes with comparatively high wing loadings. Klaus Scharnhorst aptly described this approach by saying that you should use the smallest airframe that can accommodate the power system. This means that you end up with a plane that has minimum WEIGHT (high thrust to weight ratio) and low drag, but a rather high wing loading. Pylon racers illustrate the same approach.

That is exactly what I have in mind on my <a href="http://home.online.no/~hlonning/ebandit/ebandit.html">E-Bandit</a>